Friday, May 29, 2026

Is Anthropic Worth More than OpenAI?

Anthropic has raised $65 billion in Series H funding led by Altimeter Capital, Dragoneer, Greenoaks, and Sequoia Capital, valuing the company at $965 billion post-money, a level that exceeds some estimates of OpenAI valuation of $852 billion.  


The round was co-led by Capital Group, Coatue, D1 Capital Partners, GIC, ICONIQ, and XN. Significant investors in this round include AMP PBC, Baillie Gifford, Blackstone, Brookfield, D.E. Shaw Ventures, DST Global, Fidelity Management & Research Company, General Catalyst, Insight Partners, Jane Street, Lightspeed Venture Partners, MGX, NTTVC, NX1 Capital, Situational Awareness LP, T. Rowe Price Associates, Inc., T. Rowe Price Investment Management, Inc., and Temasek. It also includes $15 billion of previously committed investments from hyperscalers, including $5 billion from Amazon.


Strategic infrastructure partners Micron, Samsung, and SK hynix also were part of the round. 


Nobody knows whether artificial intelligence is truly a financial bubble, or, if it is, when it bursts. Comparisons to the internet bubble are made and also dismissed, but at least so far, the sometimes-parabolic moves continue.


Much hinges on perceptions of future value. 


And at least so far, nobody wants to fall behind. 


We Might Prefer Income Equality, but Some Amount of Inequality is Needed to Stimulate Supply

Most of us instinctively believe “equality” is a good thing. But there are times when inequality of income might be needed to increase supply of some desired occupations.


And, oftentimes, artificial scarcities are created to support incomes. In fact, many would argue, whatever the stated public benefits (safety, for example), most forms of professional licensing exist, in large part, to protect supplier incomes by creating scarcity.


In large part, the supply of physicians, nurses, and allied health professionals depends on whether the expected lifetime rewards exceed the costs and risks of entering the profession.


But "artificial" scarcity also seems to play a role.


In healthcare, those rewards include not only salary, but also job security, social prestige, autonomy, and meaningful work. Costs include tuition, student debt, years of education, opportunity cost, licensing hurdles, burnout, and malpractice risk.


The central question is straightforward: are the incentives large enough to justify the costs, and are training bottlenecks preventing supply from responding?


Also, are there institutional barriers that artificially create scarcity when abundance is preferred by policymakers and the public, if not desired by a particular industry?


In the United States, the answer is mixed:

  • Physician incentives are very strong, but supply is constrained by training bottlenecks that arguably are intentional

  • Nursing incentives are moderate, but worsening working conditions and burnout suppress supply

  • Technician and allied-health incentives vary widely, often creating shortages in specific specialties.


People choose healthcare careers when lifetime benefits are seen as greater than costs and other burdens.


Benefits might include:

  • High pay

  • Stable employment

  • Prestige and social respect

  • Personal fulfillment

  • Geographic mobility


Costs include:

  • Tuition and debt

  • 4 to 12 years of schooling

  • Delayed earnings

  • Licensing exams and credentialing

  • Stress and burnout


When rewards rise, more people enter. When barriers rise, supply tightens. And some of those barriers arguably are intentional. 


Physicians are among the highest-paid professionals in the U.S. Average annual earnings are about $350,000, with specialists earning substantially more, according to the National Bureau of Economic Research, NBER


Other strong incentives:

  • Exceptional social status

  • High job security

  • Professional autonomy

  • Intellectual challenge

Costs

  • Undergraduate degree (4 years)

  • Medical school (4 years)

  • Residency (3–7 years)

  • Often fellowship (1–3 years)

  • Student debt commonly exceeds $200,000

  • Delayed full earnings until early to mid-30s


The key issue is not lack of interest. There are many qualified applicants. The main constraint is the limited number of residency positions, many of which depend on Medicare-funded graduate medical education, according to NBER


That scarcity is intentional, many say. The result is that:

  • Very high compensation persists

  • Entry remains restricted

  • Specialty choice is heavily influenced by income differences

  • Shortages occur in primary care and rural practice. 


The picture for nurses is more nuanced.


Registered nurses typically receive:

  • Middle- to upper-middle-class incomes

  • Strong job security

  • Geographic flexibility

  • Shorter educational path than physicians. 


Costs include:

  • 2–4 years of education

  • Licensing requirements

  • Moderate student debt.


The primary issue is not educational cost but workplace issues:

  • Burnout

  • Shift work

  • Physical strain

  • Violence exposure

  • Staffing shortages.


Although nursing remains attractive, retention problems can cause shortages even when many people enter the field.


Related fields include:

  • Radiology technologists

  • Respiratory therapists

  • Laboratory scientists

  • Sonographers

  • Surgical technologists. 


The incentives are: 

  • Shorter training periods

  • Stable employment

  • Lower debt burdens.


The challenges include:

  • Compensation sometimes insufficient relative to specialized skills

  • Limited career advancement

  • Competition from alternative occupations. 


The results include localized shortages where wages do not adequately compensate for required skills.


The point is that shortages do not necessarily mean compensation is too low.


They often result from:

  1. Training bottlenecks

  2. Geographic maldistribution

  3. Specialty maldistribution

  4. Burnout and early retirement

  5. Regulatory restrictions. 


Study

Year

Key Finding

Link

National Bureau of Economic Research – Physician Competition: Entry and Substitution

2026

Residency caps and regulatory barriers continue to ration physician supply; mid-level providers expand more rapidly.

NBER paper

National Bureau of Economic Research – Who Values Human Capitalists' Human Capital?

2023

U.S. physicians earn about $350,000 on average; earnings materially affect specialty choice and labor supply.

NBER paper

National Bureau of Economic Research – How Does Provider Supply and Regulation Influence Health Care Market?

2013

Expanded NP and PA autonomy increases effective supply, especially in primary care.

NBER paper

National Bureau of Economic Research – Relaxing Occupational Licensing Requirements

2014

Looser NP regulations reduce prices and expand hours worked by nurse practitioners.

NBER paper

National Bureau of Economic Research – Migration Policy and the Supply of Foreign Physicians

2023

Visa waivers increase physician supply in underserved communities.

NBER paper

Current Programs and Incentives to Overcome Rural Physician Shortages

2023

Loan forgiveness, scholarships, and service obligations improve rural recruitment and retention.

Springer article

Medical Residency Subsidies and Physician Shortages

2025

Expanding residency subsidies increased primary care physician supply by roughly 4% in high-need areas.

Journal of Public Economics article


The point is that to the extent “better healthcare” relies on provider supply, the U.S. healthcare system is understaffed.


Most of the discussion about the state of healthcare seems to focus on insurance. Much less attention seems focused on increasing incentives or decreasing barriers for the supply of healthcare professionals. 


Profession

Financial Incentives

Training Costs

Main Constraint

Supply Outlook

Physicians

Very high

Very high

Residency bottlenecks

Nationally attractive, but constrained

Nurses

Moderate to high

Moderate

Burnout and retention

Cyclical shortages

Allied Health

Moderate

Low to moderate

Uneven pay and capacity

Persistent specialty shortages


Shortages seemingly occur because incentives are not fully aligned with the barriers to producing and retaining healthcare professionals.


We See It Happening, But Do Not Know "Why?"

It is too early to tell whether the trend continues, for how long and at what levels, but young men (18 to 29) are behaving in a way that is sharply different from men and women in other age groups, in terms of interest in religion, according to a survey by Gallup. 


Young men in the United States have now surpassed young women in saying religion is "very important" in their lives, a reversal from trends of recent decades. 


Gallup’s latest data, from 2024-2025, show 42 percent of young men saying religion is very important to them, up sharply from 28 percent in 2022-2023.


source: Gallup 


It probably will surprise nobody that the uptick is disproportionately driven by conservative or Republican men and women, given the secular bent of people who say they are Democrats. Religious attendance (self reported, to be sure) seems nearly twice as common among those who say they are Republicans. 


source: Gallup 


Recent news reports have been relatively uniform in discussing how the trend is playing out for the Catholic Church, for example:

  • The Washington Post: Explores how Catholicism is drawing Gen Z men who are disillusioned with modern secular culture and the casual, contemporary worship styles of "big box" churches, finding a strong appeal in traditional worship and clear doctrine. 

  • The New York Times: Highlights Gallup polling data that shows a sharp increase in the share of men under 30 who say religion is "very important" to them, rising to 42 percent. 

  • The Atlantic: Details the striking double-digit increases in adult converts at metro hubs and college campuses, noting dozens of college Catholic centers welcoming record numbers of young professionals. 

  • America Magazine: Examines Gallup data showing young men as an "emerging exception" to the overall decline of religious attendance among youth, with 40 percent of young men now attending religious services frequently. 

  • ABC 7 News San Francisco: Highlights local parishes, such as St. Dominic's, experiencing growing numbers of men in their 20s and 30s seeking peace, community, and answers in the Catholic faith. 

  • The Week: Rounds up the anecdotal "standing-room only" Easter services across major archdioceses (like Boston and Newark) driven by young adults. 

  • Fox News: Covers Bishop Robert Barron's observations of young adults "leading the charge" back to the faith and driving record-breaking numbers of rite of election participants.

  • 60 Minutes interviews Catholic bishops about rising conversions. 


Anecdotally, I have seen this at my local parish as well.


AI Undermines "Answer Questions" Business Models

Chegg is one of the clearest early examples of a public company whose core business was rapidly undermined by generative AI.


But those of you who have worked in any content production industry have seen this before, in the impact of the internet on content business models.


Industry

Traditional Revenue Model

AI Threat

Risk Level

Newspapers

Ads + subscriptions

AI summaries replace clicks

Very High

News websites

Programmatic ads

Search traffic declines

Very High

Magazines

Ads + subscriptions

Commodity lifestyle content

High

Trade journals

Subscription + data

AI-generated research summaries

High

Music labels

Streaming + licensing

AI-generated songs and voice clones

High

Stock photography

Licensing fees

Text-to-image generation

Very High

Online reference sites

Ads + subscriptions

Direct AI answers

Very High

Product review sites

Affiliate commissions

AI recommendation engines

Very High

Educational publishers

Textbook sales

Personalized AI tutoring

High

Local journalism

Ads + classifieds

Reduced traffic and lower cost AI content

Very High


Chegg built a subscription business around three core assets:

  • A massive library of solved textbook problems and Q&A

  • Human experts and tutors

  • A recurring subscription model (students paid monthly for homework and study help). 


So the business moat was built on:

  • Proprietary content accumulated over years

  • Search traffic from students looking for specific solutions

  • Willingness to pay for reliable, structured answers


Generative AI changed all three assumptions, and undermined the business model.


Tools like OpenAI ChatGPT and Google Gemini offered:

  • Instant answers

  • Natural-language explanations

  • Low or zero cost

  • Broad subject coverage

  • Personalized tutoring


This turned Chegg’s premium service into a commodity.


Metric

Peak / Before AI Shock

After AI Disruption

Market capitalization

~$14.7 billion (2021 peak)

~$150–200 million (2025–2026)

Share price

~$113/share

Around $1/share

Revenue trend

Strong pandemic growth

Sustained year-over-year declines

Subscribers

Multi-million paid base

Persistent subscriber losses

2025 layoffs (May)

~248 employees (22%)

2025 layoffs (October)

~388 employees (45% of remaining workforce)


But Chegg likely will not be alone. Other lines of business might have similar characteristics:

  • Sell information rather than physical goods

  • Depend on labor-intensive expert work

  • Have low switching costs

  • Offer outputs that can be generated in text, image, audio, or code. 


Industry

Traditional Value Proposition

AI Substitute

Risk Level

Examples

Homework help

Solved problems and tutoring

ChatGPT-style tutoring

Very High

Chegg

SEO content agencies

Human-written articles

Automated article generation

Very High

Jasper

Translation services

Human translation

Neural machine translation

Very High

DeepL

Basic legal drafting

Contracts and standard documents

AI document drafting

High

Harvey AI

Tax preparation

Form completion and guidance

AI tax copilots

High

Intuit

Customer service BPO

Human support agents

AI chat and voice bots

Very High

Zendesk AI

Coding contractors

Routine software work

Code generation assistants

High

GitHub Copilot

Graphic design for simple tasks

Logos and ad creatives

Image generators

High

Adobe Firefly

Market research summaries

Analyst reports

Automated synthesis

High

AlphaSense

Recruiting screening

Resume review

AI candidate matching

High

LinkedIn Talent Solutions

Medical transcription

Dictation and coding

Speech-to-text + AI coding

Very High

Nuance Communications

Stock photography

Generic images

AI image generation

Very High

Shutterstock


As was the case when the internet disruption began, content suppliers will be in the line of fire:

  • Research report subscriptions

  • Professional tutoring services

  • Basic legal document preparation

  • Simple coding tutorials

  • Generic content websites

  • Q&A platforms charging for access

  • Standardized test prep companies. 


If you can describe your service as “We answer questions about X,” danger clearly exists, as AI will provide a substitute.


Is Anthropic Worth More than OpenAI?

Anthropic has raised $65 billion in Series H funding led by Altimeter Capital, Dragoneer, Greenoaks, and Sequoia Capital, valuing the compa...